So I was reading one of those crappy slideshow write ups on a site that popped up about Macaulay Culkin and MJ.

It had the line "you won't believe what happened to MC whilst at Neverland!"

Of course this was just to entice the reader as nothing did happen to him. There was one slide that talked about things found at Neverland during the raid, totally sensationalised:

"Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch was raided in 2003 amid claims that the pop star had stockpiles of child pornography and had molested children at the location. Over 70 police officers searched the premises and what they found was beyond disturbing. Authorities confiscated numerous items, including a “collection of pornography that included images and footage of naked children and adults, as well as animal torture, bondage, and sadomasochism.”

The writer is called Melina Papadopolous and a complaint about an article on the site can be found here:

Worth mentioning to them that the writer has presented the article in a way to insinuate and as a direct character assassination of MJ, without providing accurate scope and truth about the items and ownership.

Thanks All.

S
]]>Trials And Tribulationsseanyhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/141214-Sickening-innuendo-reported-on-IcePop-com-Help-with-complainingPredator Harvey Weinstein Used Michael Jackson as a Destractionhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/141131-Predator-Harvey-Weinstein-Used-Michael-Jackson-as-a-Destraction?goto=newpost
Thu, 07 Dec 2017 00:34:27 GMTIn a new article by the New York times, it was revealed that Harvey Weinstein had people "supply gossip" about MJ to trade them with stories about his own scandals. Now we know why the media was so invested in destroying MJ. They were part of a machine that paid them to do so.

Keeping the Media Close
Shortly after the news investigations of Mr. Weinstein’s alleged abuse were published, A. J. Benza, a former New York Daily News gossip columnist, received a two-word text from the producer: “Help me.”

Mr. Benza had been integral to the network of friendly journalists — gossip columnists, magazine writers, editors and authors — whom the producer relied on to promote his entertainment empire and sometimes punish rivals or deflect threats.

Over dinner in West Hollywood in late 2003 or early the next year, the men had discussed a plan to help Mr. Weinstein avoid embarrassment. While married to his first wife, he had become involved with someone else, Mr. Benza discovered. A clerk at a Los Angeles art studio where he commissioned a gift for Mr. Weinstein — a painting of a reimagined “Hollywood” sign reading “Harveywood” — volunteered to Mr. Benza that a friend, Georgina Chapman, was seeing the producer. Mr. Weinstein, who would later marry Ms. Chapman, was separated and wanted to keep the relationship confidential until he was divorced, according to his spokeswoman, Sallie Hofmeister.

Mr. Benza, then between jobs, had a suggestion. “I could supply your P.R. girls with a lot of gossip — a lot of stories — and if people come at them with the ‘Harvey’s having an affair story,’ they can barter,” Mr. Benza recalled telling Mr. Weinstein. “He said, ‘A. J., it’s got to be good stories,’ and I said, ‘Don’t you worry about it.’”

Collecting a monthly retainer, Mr. Benza said, he reported items on Roger Clemens, Michael Jackson and others and sent them to Mr. Weinstein’s communications team, though he didn’t know whether they were used to trade away stories about the producer. Mr. Weinstein’s spokeswoman said the payments to Mr. Benza were for public relations work during Miramax’s dispute with Disney.

After 10 months, Mr. Weinstein said, “I think the coast is clear; I think we beat this thing,” according to Mr. Benza, who recently had a brief stint as a writer for American Media and also runs his own gossip podcast, “Fame Is a Bitch.”

Mr. Benza and Mr. Weinstein were exploiting a longstanding system of favor-trading between the press and the movie business. Gossip writers need a stream of insider scoops, industry beat reporters need exclusives on the next big deal and glossy magazines need celebrities who can drive newsstand sales. Mr. Weinstein, who wanted glowing coverage, could provide that and more.

The producer often held out business opportunities to those who covered him. He had book and movie deals with writers and editors at Fox News, The New York Post, Premiere magazine, Vanity Fair, Varietyand elsewhere. In Mr. Benza’s case, a book contract came immediately after he left The Daily News. In interviews, several journalists who had business ties to him said the arrangements did not cause them to pull punches.

He had particularly strong ties to the tabloid giant American Media — owner of The Enquirer, Globe, OK!, Radar Online and others — with which he teamed up to pursue several media and production deals.

I'm watching it now, it's full of experts telling what surgeries he'd had, and why (because of course they know) but they haven't mentioned lupus yet, or the fact that he broke his nose.

Just thought it might interest you, if you fancy watching it.
]]>Trials And Tribulationshttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/141027-The-10-Faces-of-Michael-Jackson-on-UK-TV-nowhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140974-Alleged-reconstruction-of-MJ-s-nose?goto=newpost
Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:15:20 GMTIn an article from The Daily Telegraph (2009), Dr. Arnold Klein claims to have worked on reconstructing MJ's nose using fillers, since it was damaged so much according to the doctor. Here is the article.
There is a picture of Michael Jackson's face from 2009, contrasting a before and after situation. Here is the photo. In this picture, Michael looks younger (again), I can't put my finger on it, but his eyes look much more relaxed, his nose thicker.

What do you think with regards to Klein having tried to help Michael look better. Did you see any differences? If so, what exactly?

I personally believe Michael Jackson looked great during the later years of his life, especially This Is It.

I don't feel obliged to explain myself; however, I do want to express my admiration for Michael's physical appearance throughout his entire life. This thread is not a look-how-much-he's-changed kind of a discussion, but merely an opportunity to discuss and share ideas with people who also believe Michael looked good but are also willing to respectfully discuss the topic. If you feel you can't positively contribute to this thread, please take your responsibility by preventing the discussion from becoming a heated argument.
]]>Trials And TribulationsSteven1990http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140974-Alleged-reconstruction-of-MJ-s-noseChanging skin colourhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140791-Changing-skin-colour?goto=newpost
Tue, 26 Sep 2017 18:54:46 GMTWhy did so many people have so much to say about Michaels skin colour changing but I've never seen anything mentioned about his sister who also has lighter skin than she did when she was younger. To be honest her and Michael look like twins. I'd like to hear why you think the press had to hound him so much about his changing looks. There are so many celebrities who look nothing like they did when they first started out due to plastic surgery and although you might see small articles about this just to sell trash magazines they in no way hound them like they did Michael

:mj5:
]]>Trials And TribulationsEmJ1979http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140791-Changing-skin-colourhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140722-Ola-Ray-who-played-in-iconic-Thriller-video-to-sue-MJ-s-estate-for-royalties!-v-2017?goto=newpost
Wed, 06 Sep 2017 16:38:06 GMTEXCLUSIVE: Playboy cover girl and actress who played Michael Jackson's girlfriend in iconic Thriller music video to sue singer's estate for royalties following a new 3D version of the cult classic
*Ola Ray, the actress in Michael Jackson's iconic Thriller music video, is set to sue the late singer's estate for royalties that she says she's owed
*Director of the original music video, John Landis, premiered a 3D version of the cult classic at the Venice Film Festival on Monday
*Ray, who modeled for Playboy and was Playmate of the Month in 1980, claims she is owed money for this new version
*The 57-year-old says she is owed 2.5 percent of the total royalties from Thriller but has been paid less than $200,000 and lives below the poverty line
*Optimum Productions re-released the 3D clip - a move that could make millions

A Playboy model who starred alongside Michael Jackson in Thriller is set to sue the singer's estate for millions in royalties.

Ola Ray, 57, played the King of Pop's girlfriend in the 1983 cult classic music video, which has been viewed more than 437 million times on YouTube.

The former Playboy centerfold, from Los Angeles, tells DailyMail.com in an exclusive interview she's owed 2.5 percent of the total royalties from Thriller for her role in the production.

Ray claims she's been paid less than $200,000 in the 34 years since the iconic video was created and says she has been forced to live below the poverty line.

She is speaking out after Optimum Productions released the clip in 3D form at the Venice Film Festival on Monday, and is about to sue for royalties based on the new version.

Ray claims no one contacted her to let her know about the new film and was shunned from its world premiere as the company could make millions from the new version.

She now plans to bring the long-simmering battle to an end by taking the case to court in a bid to get what she's owed.

The mom-of-one said: 'I'm outraged, upset and in shock.

'When I heard rumors about a possible 3D version I contacted the director and said, "We need to talk about this," but he never responded to my email.

'They haven't tried to contact me or negotiate anything.

'How do they think they can just do this without paying me?

'These people are making millions of dollars out of me but all I have received over 30 years is $200,000.

'They will make millions more out of this.

'If I'm not getting paid, no one should be able to see it.

Ray was in her early twenties when she beat hundreds of other hopefuls to play Jackson's girlfriend in the original Thriller, released in 1983.

The 14-minute short went on to help MJ's Thriller album top the US chart for 37 weeks, selling a reputed 120 million copies and making it the best-selling record of all time.

Ray says she was initially only paid $2,500 for her part in the video, which she admits she would have done 'for nothing'.

But she claims MJ promised her 2.5 percent of the royalties from the Thriller film, which was the most expensive music video of its era with a budget of $500,000.

In 2012 the ex-glamour model was awarded $75,000 for back payment of royalties following a court battle but $20,000 of that went to her attorney.

Now Ray claims she should also be paid for the new 3D release of the video.

Director John Landis, who also directed the original Thriller, said the new film uses the 'latest available technology' and boasts of the 'highest quality audio and visual experience'.

Speaking at the Venice Film Festival, he also revealed that it is a preamble to bigger announcements and that two more Jackson legacy projects are to come.

Ray added : 'I was so excited about being in Thriller. I knew it was really big.

'I probably would have done it for nothing but Michael gave me a contract.

'Despite what I was promised I ended up having to raise my daughter, who is now 22, basically on welfare.

'I have had to live below my means and in poverty because of this.

'If I had been receiving the money I should have received my life would be drastically different.

'They are trying to be sneaky again, but I really, truly believe that I will get what's owed to me this time around.'

Attorney Scott Cole, who is advising Ray, said: 'It's shameful Ms. Ray wasn't invited and welcomed with open arms at the Venice festival.

'Ms. Ray had a central role in this iconic production.

'Shutting her out of her full royalties all these years hardly honors the memory of Michael or the spirit of the relevant contracts.'

Last month a jury ruled that Quincy Jones, who produced the Thriller album, was owed $9.4million in royalties and fees by Michael Jackson's estate.

The estate had contended that Jones was owed just $392,000.
]]>Trials And TribulationsILoveHIStoryhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140722-Ola-Ray-who-played-in-iconic-Thriller-video-to-sue-MJ-s-estate-for-royalties!-v-2017Remembering Michael Jackson: When the Jacksons business empire was based in New Jerseyhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140691-Remembering-Michael-Jackson-When-the-Jacksons-business-empire-was-based-in-New-Jersey?goto=newpost
Tue, 29 Aug 2017 21:58:10 GMTThe members of the Jacksons make bold statements on the stage. But in the business world, the family operated quietly in the 1990s in the relatively...The members of the Jacksons make bold statements on the stage. But in the business world, the family operated quietly in the 1990s in the relatively obscure confines of Metro Park in the Iselin section of Woodbridge.

That was the site of Jackson Communications Inc., or JCI, according to a lawyer who worked for JCI.

"Jackson Communications Inc. was going to be an entertainment conglomerate," said the lawyer, who wished to remain anonymous. "They were interested in the rehab of Asbury Park."

However, the company, headed by Jermaine Jackson and jointly owned by all 11 members of the family, stumbled early on. A 1994 TV special called "Jackson Family Honors," JCI's first entertainment venture, bombed when Michael made only a brief appearance.

The show was announced shortly after Michael was first accused of molesting young children.

In turn, JCI owed the production company several thousand dollars and Michael was later sued in federal court by JCI, which claimed he reneged on an agreement to perform on the show.

But before the "Family Honors" fiasco, there were discussions in the offices of JCI on the building of an entertainment pavilion in Asbury Park.

However, JCI couldn't seem to decide whether to build an entertainment complex in the Shore resort town or Las Vegas. Plans were announced to start construction in early 1993 on a 40,000-square-foot entertainment center as part of the Desert Winds Hotel and Casino in Vegas.

Like the Asbury Park entertainment complex that as never built, the Las Vegas endeavor never got off the planning board, if it got that far.

In 1992, JCI entered a business deal that would later make headlines across the country. At the time, JCI agreed to fund a plan to reorganize HVV Corp., the company that owned the assets of Kramer Music Products Inc., a Neptune-based guitar manufacturer.

HVV was owned by Shore area businessman Henry V. Vaccaro Sr.

The deal was that JCI would pay off the company's debts and pump $1 million into the business, according to reports. JCI would then take control of the Kramer guitar name and trademark.

A first payment of $225,000 was delivered by JCI to the bankruptcy court under the reorganization plan, but no further payments were made.

"Michael Jackson was getting into his own legal problems at that time and investors in JCI were bailing out," Vaccaro said to the Asbury Park Press in 1998.

Eventually, JCI filed for bankruptcy protection in 1996 and a $1.3 million judgment was made against JCI in HVV's favor. Michael, LaToya, Janet and Jackie Jackson were relieved of the debt, but the rest of the family had to ante up.

U.S. marshals raided the home of the Jackson parents after the family refused to pay and the feds confiscated a baby grand piano, the one on which Michael allegedly wrote the album "Thriller," a 1963 Silver Cloud Rolls-Royce and anything else worth a buck.

The items later went up for auction and JCI is now a distant memory.

"It was fun and exciting working there," the lawyer said of JCI. "All the brothers were nice but Michael was a little weird."

Michael, who would have been 59 on Tuesday, Aug. 29. passed away on June 25, 2009.

"I feel so bad for his mother and father," said Henry Vaccaro in 2009. "We lost an incredible performer. I had my troubles with him legally, but I would never demean the man's talent."

Bill Cosby has hired high-profile lawyer Thomas Mesereau, who won an acquittal for Michael Jackson during his 2005 child-molestation trial and describes himself as "unconventional."

The announcement of a new legal team — which includes former federal prosecutor Kathleen Bliss and prominent Pennsylvania attorney Sam Silver — was made on the comedian's Twitter account Monday, a day before a scheduled hearing in his case.

His previous attorneys, Brian McMonagle and Angela Agrusa, had notified the court that they would not be representing Cosby when he is retried on charges he drugged and molested Andrea Constand at his Pennsylvania home in 2004.

His first trial ended with a hung jury in June after 52 hours of deliberations.

Mesereau, who is based in Los Angeles, has been involved in several celebrity cases, including the murder trial and acquittal of actor Robert Blake, although he also does pro bono work in capital cases in the South.

On his website, he describes himself as an "unconventional, unpredictable trial lawyer." He told NBC News he was not commenting on the Cosby case beyond confirming that he was joining the defense.

In an January 2016 interview with MSNBC, after Cosby was charged with sexually assaulting Constand, he drew parallels between the case and Jackson's trial.

"The worldwide media had already condemned him and basically discarded him as trash," Mesereau said of the pop star. "I see something similar happening now."

"I don't know Mr. Cosby," Mesereau added. "I don't know the evidence. I don't know the accuser. I just think he has the right to a fair trial. And having been through what I went through with Michael Jackson, I'm a little alarmed by the groundswell of opposition [to Cosby]."

After the mistrial was declared but before he was retained by Cosby, Mesereau told TMZ that it was mistake for prosecutors to retry Cosby.

"I think it's a weak case," he said. "It's a waste of time.'

The Pennsylvania case represents the only criminal charges stemming from accusations by dozens of women that range from groping to rape and span decades. Cosby, 80, has denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to assaulting Constand.

He did not take the stand during the first trial but his former attorneys said there was a possibility he might testify the second time around.

In his retrial, Cosby will be represented by a new lead attorney, Tom Mesereau, who is replacing Brian McMonagle. Mesereau previously won an acquittal in Michael Jackson's 2005 child molestation trial.
]]>Trials And TribulationsILoveHIStoryhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140661-Bill-Cosby-Hires-Tom-Mesereau-Who-Won-Acquittal-for-Michael-Jacksonhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140603-Taylor-Swift-Trial-Echoes-Michael-Jackson-s-Trip-to-Denver-Court?goto=newpost
Mon, 07 Aug 2017 21:22:51 GMTToday, jury selection begins in the court battle between former Denver DJ David Mueller and pop star Taylor Swift; he claims she got him fired by...Today, jury selection begins in the court battle between former Denver DJ David Mueller and pop star Taylor Swift; he claims she got him fired by falsely accusing him of groping her prior to a June 2013 concert at the Pepsi Center, while she maintains that Muller "reached up under my skirt and grabbed my ass right when I was having to pose for a photo" that was subsequently made public against the wishes of all parties involved. The controversy has resulted in the biggest celebrity trial in Denver since 1994, when King of Pop Michael Jackson was hauled into court after being accused of plagiarism by Crystal Cartier, a local singer-songwriter.

Cartier argued that the the title track of Jackson's 1991 album Dangerous ripped off her 1988 tune of the same name, and even though she lost in court, her largely forgotten legal battle has actually had significant repercussions, just as the Swift-Mueller face-off could.

In 2009, after Jackson's shocking death, we revisited the Cartier case with the help of Stan Soocher, an associate professor of music and entertainment-industry studies working on the University of Colorado's Denver campus. Soocher is the author of They Fought the Law: Rock Music Goes to Court, a book published in 1998 that he was then updating for reissue — and he devoted an entire chapter of the tome to copyright issues involving Jackson, with significant attention paid to l'affaire Cartier. As Soocher told us, "I wasn't living in Colorado at the time, but I covered the Cartier trial. And it turned out to be quite an interesting case."

A precursor to the Cartier complaint took place in Illinois during the ’80s, Soocher noted. In that matter, a composer sued CBS Records, Jackson's label, claiming that "The Girl Is Mine," a Jackson duet with Paul McCartney included on the mega-selling 1982 platter Thriller, stole its essence from a ditty called "Please Love Me Now." The plaintiff claimed that he'd submitted a demo tape including the latter to the imprint, making unauthorized borrowing possible. In response, CBS, representing Jackson, who wasn't specifically named in the court filing but did take the witness stand to defend himself, claimed independent creation and prior common source — a pair of legal concepts that laymen might find mildly contradictory.

As the name implies, independent creation argues that the similarities between disputed songs are entirely coincidental, because the artists came up with the tunes on their own. In contrast, prior common source posits that said song resembles other compositions that might have served as conscious or unconscious inspirations. In the case of "The Girl Is Mine," CBS's attorneys cited three highly disparate possibilities: "Longer, by Dan Fogelberg, plus the themes from two television shows: Cheers, the iconic sitcom, and Maverick, a vintage Western.

Crystal Cartier in 2015.

The decision in respect to "The Girl Is Mine" wasn't a slam dunk; jurors deliberated for more than twenty hours. Eventually, though, they sided with CBS — and afterward, the company made changes that would have repercussions throughout the music biz. "The case led CBS to institute a general policy of not accepting unsolicited submissions," Soocher pointed out. "It was a real blow to new artists trying to get their music heard, especially in the pre-Internet days. But it became the industry standard."

Cut to the Cartier trial, in early 1994. Jackson had been sued numerous times since "The Girl Is Mine" brouhaha, but none of those issues got to the point where he had to testify. Soocher speculated that some disagreements may have been settled not because they had any merit, but because a cash payment would be less expensive than drawn-out litigation. However, Cartier turned down a settlement offer, and her persistence forced Jackson's gloved hand.

Soocher recalled that Jackson came to Denver with as little fanfare as possible, turning up at the courthouse in an anonymous van and entering the building via a side door. Cartier, for her part, arrived in a limousine in an outfit that struck Soocher and plenty of other observers as much more outrageous than what Jackson wore. That kind of thing didn't happen to MJ very often.

As a music lover (he got his start as a rock journalist before turning to the law and then academia), Soocher was fascinated by Jackson's testimony, which is accessible online. "He went through and described his writing process," he said. "For anyone who wanted to know how he came up with his material, it was a very good explanation. It was like taking a course from Michael Jackson on how he wrote his songs — very enlightening and very colorful."

Of course, Jackson's legal team relied on more than their client's word to establish his innocence. "Experts are brought into these trials with charts and graphs. They'll talk about song structures and compare one to the other," Soocher allowed. But this approach is of dubious value, in Soocher's view. "These things are really determined from the point of view of the average listener — so ultimately it's up to the jury or the judge to decide if something sounds too much like something else. Now, in fact, many copyright-infringement cases are dismissed by judges at the pre-trial stage. A judge will say, 'I'll listen to it like I listen to all music, and then I'll decide.'"

Cartier's argument was weak on these grounds; to this listener, Jackson's "Dangerous" was hardly a clone of hers. And she undermined herself further by not presenting an original 1988 recording in court. According to Soocher, Cartier said she gave out all the demos of her song long before the Dangerous album's release — so she recorded a new version. The court's determination not to accept such a remake constitutes "an important procedural point that came out of the case," Soocher said, and is likely to have contributed to a verdict that cleared Jackson of wrongdoing.

By the way, Cartier's website lists her city of residence as Aurora. A 2015 post reads in part, "I cried when MJ died because it closed the door on any future hope of reconciliation. But one thing remains clear.... I do not want the stigma of warring with MJ to be my only legacy."

It's too soon to know if Swift will win the day in the current case, which is likely to turn on a different kind of interpretation — whether the aforementioned photo, seen here, shows a "sexual assault," as her legal team maintains, or an innocent pose that was badly misconstrued. But if Swift does indeed testify, as is widely expected, her appearance will be the starriest in a Denver-area courthouse since Jackson's more than 23 years ago.

By Michael Roberts

http://www.westword.com/news/taylor-...cksons-9341320
]]>Trials And TribulationsILoveHIStoryhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140603-Taylor-Swift-Trial-Echoes-Michael-Jackson-s-Trip-to-Denver-CourtImportant. Text, email, call in D L Hugley show for this reasonhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140512-Important-Text-email-call-in-D-L-Hugley-show-for-this-reason?goto=newpost
Tue, 18 Jul 2017 21:23:30 GMThttps://twitter.com/DLHughleyRadio/with_replies
I knew someone was going to do this when this story of R Kelly came up. On hi show, D L Hugley...https://twitter.com/DLHughleyRadio/with_replies

I knew someone was going to do this when this story of R Kelly came up. On hi show, D L Hugley tried to compare MJ to R Kelly and it is clear he does not know the facts of MJ case. His co host was trying to tell him why it is not the same but the reason he was giving was clear he did not know what he was talking about. He does not trash MJ but it is clear he is dumb to the case. I those with the info to send it to the show. They do read. Lets educated DL Hugley. I could not let this go.
]]>Trials And Tribulationsterrellhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140512-Important-Text-email-call-in-D-L-Hugley-show-for-this-reasonRare, Unreleased Michael Jackson Album Goes Up for Auctionhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140472-Rare-Unreleased-Michael-Jackson-Album-Goes-Up-for-Auction?goto=newpost
Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:49:32 GMTNine unheard songs will go to the highest bidder in Gotta Have Rock and Roll auction, though winner unable to release music
An album containing...Nine unheard songs will go to the highest bidder in Gotta Have Rock and Roll auction, though winner unable to release music

An album containing nine unheard Michael Jackson songs will be auctioned off by New York auction house Gotta Have Rock and Roll later this month. The album, which appears as a blank disc with the word "Bible" written in pen, is one of many Jackson items available to preview before a public online auction that lasts from July 19th to 28th.

The unreleased songs appear on a CD that was in Jackson's possession. Alternate mixes of the three songs on the recording have already surfaced: "Monster," "Breaking News" and "Keep Your Head Up" all appeared on Michael in 2010. The other nine tracks, all of which are reportedly master quality, have not been released.

The starting bid on the unreleased album is $50,000, though organizers tell Rolling Stone that they expect the final price to go as high as $1 million. Whoever takes home the CD will not own rights to the music, so the winning bidder cannot distribute the recording. According to the auction house, the album was obtained by "the personal friend and personal assistant to Michael whose family was very close to Michael for many years, traveling all over the world with him." When reached for comment, a rep for Gotta Have Rock and Roll said Jackson's friend wished to remain anonymous.

The auction will also include the handwritten letter Tupac sent to Madonna while in prison in 1995 in which the rapper discusses the reasons for their breakup. That letter is expected to sell for over $100,000.

Two albums of Jacksons' songs have come out since his death in 2009. The first, Michael, was a source of controversy: several longtime Jackson associates believed that the vocals on some songs – notably "Breaking News," included again on this album for auction – did not actually belong to the King of Pop. In an interview with Rolling Stone, Will.i.am, who worked with Jackson during the 2000s, said the new record was "not Michael Jackson," before adding flatly, "it disgusts me." Jackson's brother Randy also questioned the authenticity of the vocals.

In response to these concerns, Howard Weitzman, a lawyer for the Jackson estate, went so far as to release a statement saying that "one of the best-known forensic musicologists in the nation" – Weitzman did not name the investigator – had determined that the vocals belonged to Jackson.

The follow-up album, 2014's Xscape, did not set off as many high-profile arguments. A-list producers like Timbaland, Stargate and Darkchild filled out tracks that Jackson started between 1983 and 1999. Lead single "Love Never Felt so Good" climbed to Number Nine on the Hot 100.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...uction-w491745
]]>Trials And TribulationsILoveHIStoryhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140472-Rare-Unreleased-Michael-Jackson-Album-Goes-Up-for-Auctionhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140443-Good-News!-Judge-Dismisses-Safechuck-s-Case?goto=newpost
Sat, 08 Jul 2017 11:00:07 GMT*Safechuck case...]]>Since this is good news about the case that has been distressing for many fans since 2014, it should be here too.

Safechuck case dismissed for good, Robson case is doomed

Finally some excellent news to report. According to the case summary, on June 26th MJ Estate filed their summary judgment motion to dismiss Wade Robson’s case. When we went to the court to get the Robson documents, we also asked about any filings at Safechuck case and we found out that Judge Beckloff ruled on June 28th on the Estate’s demurrer and dismissed Safechuck’s case for good. Time to celebrate.

Keep in mind that for the purposes of demurrer, the judge is required by law to accept all the claims by Safechuck as true and only determines if there is a legal basis for the lawsuit. Also I want to emphasize that judge summarizing Safechuck allegations in his ruling doesn’t mean he believes them. In fact, the Judge even notes the requirement on page 9 of the ruling: "Accepting plaintiff's allegations as true (as the court must on demurrer except to the extent such factual allegations are contradicted by prior pleadings or judicially noticeable facts)...". Estate is also limited as they cannot present any new evidence at the demurrer phase. They can only argue against Safechuck’s claims using the law and the precedent cases.

Now according to the law, sexual abuse cases against nonperpetrator entities – MJ Companies in this instance- can be brought prior to plaintiff’s 26th birthday. Safechuck was 36 years old when he filed this complaint. There is one exception to the 26th birthday rule. This exception requires that (a) entity knew or had reason to know of any unlawful sexual conduct of employee and (b) failed to take reasonable steps to prevent or avoid such unlawful conduct.

In the latest amended complaint by the new lawyers, Safechuck also made several negligence claims – negligent hiring, retention, supervision, failure to warn etc. According to the law for any negligence claim Safechuck needs to demonstrate the MJ Companies had a legal duty towards Safechuck. This requires to demonstrate (a) special relationship between the MJ Companies and Safechuck and (b) “ability to control the person that needs to be controlled”. A Supreme Court ruling said “the entity defendant must have some ability to control the sexual abuse perpetrator”. This means Safechuck needed to demonstrate that MJ Companies had control over Michael.

Beckloff expressed his concerns about Safechuck’s employment claims. Safechuck alleged he was employed back in 1988 and was compensated with travel, lodging, clothing etc. Beckloff was sceptical about that employment claims. Beckloff noted the internship Safechuck did in 1994/95 – after alleged abuse ended- was more traditional and formal employment. But despite his scepticism, for the demurrer purposes Beckloff accepted Safechuck’s claims that he was employed back in 1988 and considered it enough to demonstrate a special relationship between MJ Companies and Safechuck. This is once again because on demurrer he is required to accept anything plaintiff claims as true and therefore, as he notes on page 11, he treated those claims of employment by Safechuck liberally for demurrer purposes: “Considered liberally and read together, the court assumes for purposes of this demurrer that these allegations are sufficient to demonstrate a special relationship between the then minor plaintiff and the entity defendants.” It does not mean he personally believes Safechuck, or that he believes he was indeed employed by the MJ Companies since 1988, or makes any judgement about the truthfulness of his claims at all. He simply has a requirement to treat Plaintiff’s claims as true on a demurrer.

In his complaint Safechuck’s had claimed that Norma Staikos told an employee “not to leave children alone in a room with Michael Jackson”. As the judge was required to accept these claims as true in demurrer, he classified this as Safechuck being a foreseeable victim.

After that it went downhill for Safechuck. The control issue ended it for him. Judge stated that there must be an ability or right to control. As we explained before, Michael Jackson was the sole shareholder and only owner of MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures. This meant Michael had absolute control over the MJ Companies and everyone employed by them. This alone meant Safechuck cannot succeed in satisfying the legal requirements so the judge dismissed his complaint with no chance to amend.

Sure, Safechuck can appeal this decision but the odds of being successful is slim. This ruling also signals that Robson won’t be able to succeed in the control aspect as well.

A few tidbits:

During the hearing for demurrer, Judge Beckloff asked Safechuck’s lawyers about the control issue. They argued that an employee of MJ Companies should have refused to make travel arrangements for Safechuck. In his ruling Judge says this doesn’t establish control requirement.

Legal side aside think about this for a second. Safechuck’s “genius” lawyer basically argues that Michael asks Norma to make travel arrangements for Safechuck and Norma could have said no and refuse to do the reservations. That would “control” Michael and stop any alleged abuse in their minds. Realistically though Norma would have gotten fired and someone else, even an outside travel agent could have done reservations.

Finally this gem:

During demurrer hearing Robson and Safechuck lawyer argued that Safechuck and Robson cases are basically the same thing and they cannot be separated. Judge commented that Estate lawyers also agree with that. Estate lawyer stated that they agree and they believe they will succeed in Safechuck demurrer and Robson summary judgment. “We’ll see about that” Robson / Safechuck lawyer said.

Yeah we saw about that. Estate DID succeed in their Safechuck demurrer. This also might be the one and only time that we at Daily Michael agree with Robson/Safechuck lawyers. It’s the same claims about the same entities, so you cannot separate these cases. That’s why according to us Safechuck’s loss in control issue means Robson will lose in the control issue as well. Suddenly Robson’s recent “healing” and going back to dancing in the entertainment business makes sense. He should know that he ain’t getting a dime from The Bank of Michael Jackson.

Next week we will have several posts about Estate’s summary judgment motion in Robson case as well as the Joy Robson deposition. As a teaser, I will say that in their summary judgment Estate heavily relied on Joy Robson deposition. Mommy dearest wasn’t much of a help, especially when she called her son Wade an Oscar worthy liar.

This is bad news for Robson. :dancin:
]]>Trials And TribulationsInvincibleMJhttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140443-Good-News!-Judge-Dismisses-Safechuck-s-CasePaul McCartney settles with Sony/ATV over Beatles music rightshttp://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/140415-Paul-McCartney-settles-with-Sony-ATV-over-Beatles-music-rights?goto=newpost
Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:43:07 GMT*Paul McCartney has reached a confidential settlement of his lawsuit against Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC in which he sought to reclaim copyrights...Paul McCartney has reached a confidential settlement of his lawsuit against Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC in which he sought to reclaim copyrights to songs by the Beatles.

The accord disclosed on Thursday in filings with the U.S. District Court in Manhattan ends the 75-year-old McCartney's pre-emptive effort to ensure that the copyrights, once owned by Michael Jackson, would go to him starting in October 2018.

U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos signed an order dismissing the case, but agreed to revisit it if a dispute arose.

The dismissal request had been made by Michael Jacobs, a lawyer for McCartney, on behalf of the singer and Sony/ATV.

It is unclear how the accord affects McCartney's copyright claims. The singer's representatives could not immediately be reached on Friday for comment.

McCartney had sued on Jan. 18 for a declaration that he could reclaim more than 260 copyrights, including for songs credited to him and John Lennon such as "I Want to Hold Your Hand," "Yesterday" and "Hey Jude."

The registrations at issue also covered "Maybe I'm Amazed" and several other songs McCartney recorded as a solo artist.

They even covered such titles as "Scrambled Egg," which is close to the working lyric "Scrambled Eggs" that McCartney once used for the song that became "Yesterday."

McCartney had been outbid by Jackson in 1985 for the Beatles' song rights, which were later rolled into Sony/ATV, a joint venture with Sony Corp.

The pop star's estate sold its stake in that venture to Sony for $750 million last year.

McCartney sued 1-1/2 months after a British court said the pop group Duran Duran could not reclaim rights to their songs, in its case against Sony/ATV's Gloucester Place Music unit.

Changes made in 1976 to U.S. copyright law let authors like McCartney reclaim song rights after periods of time elapsed.

In his lawsuit, McCartney said he could begin exercising his rights on Beatles songs, starting with "Love Me Do," on Oct. 5, 2018.

The case is McCartney v Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 17-00363.